August 2011 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] loading nautilus in a 1.4?

by Alexandre Bergel

I am trying. We should pair program this week Cheers, Alexandre On 19 Aug 2011, at 17:10, Benjamin wrote: > Thanks for report, it's fixed now :) > > > > Ben > > > On Aug 19, 2011, at 12:35 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> I get this error: >> >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >> This package depends on the following classes: >> ClassEnvironment >> BrowserEnvironment >> You must resolve these dependencies before you will be able to load these definitions: >> BrowserEnvironment>>packageOrganizer >> BrowserEnvironment>>packages >> ClassEnvironment>>packages >> >> Select Proceed to continue, or close this window to cancel the operation. >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Aug. 19, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] loading nautilus in a 1.4?

by Benjamin

Thanks for report, it's fixed now :) Ben On Aug 19, 2011, at 12:35 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Hi! > > I get this error: > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > This package depends on the following classes: > ClassEnvironment > BrowserEnvironment > You must resolve these dependencies before you will be able to load these definitions: > BrowserEnvironment>>packageOrganizer > BrowserEnvironment>>packages > ClassEnvironment>>packages > > Select Proceed to continue, or close this window to cancel the operation. > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > >

Aug. 19, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] setUp and test methods

by laurent laffont

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>wrote: > Indeed, refactorings for unit tests are completely absent from the software > engineering community. > Oh, so you just have to invent it :) Laurent. > > Alexandre > > > On 19 Aug 2011, at 15:39, laurent laffont wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Alexandre Bergel < > alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > > Before leading a revolution, we can maybe have this work for unit test > first :-) > > > > Actually, when I think about it, having not the setUp visible when > writing tests make the setUp functionality mostly useless. > > > > > > Also, I usually write the setUp to remove duplication, so often after the > second test method. A refactoring "extract to setUp" would be cool too. > > > > Another point, when I have a hierarchy of TestCase I often feel I need a > "merged setUp view" > > > > Laurent. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > Alexandre > > > > > > On 19 Aug 2011, at 15:19, laurent laffont wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Alexandre Bergel < > alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > I know there are many TDD shoguns around. > > > > > > I was wondering whether I am the only one suffering from the need to > see the definition of setUp before writing a test method. Unfortunately, > current tool does not automatically show the definition of setUp when I want > to write a new test. > > > The cost of seeing how the setUp is done is high: need to open a new > window, clicking to restore the context on the first window, ... > > > > > > Am I the only one? > > > > > > > > > No. I would like too. > > > > > > But not only for tests. I often need to look at several related methods > at once while developing. > > > > > > Laurent. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Alexandre > > > -- > > > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > > > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > > > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > >

Aug. 19, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] setUp and test methods

by Alexandre Bergel

Indeed, refactorings for unit tests are completely absent from the software engineering community. Alexandre On 19 Aug 2011, at 15:39, laurent laffont wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > Before leading a revolution, we can maybe have this work for unit test first :-) > > Actually, when I think about it, having not the setUp visible when writing tests make the setUp functionality mostly useless. > > > Also, I usually write the setUp to remove duplication, so often after the second test method. A refactoring "extract to setUp" would be cool too. > > Another point, when I have a hierarchy of TestCase I often feel I need a "merged setUp view" > > Laurent. > > > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > > On 19 Aug 2011, at 15:19, laurent laffont wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I know there are many TDD shoguns around. > > > > I was wondering whether I am the only one suffering from the need to see the definition of setUp before writing a test method. Unfortunately, current tool does not automatically show the definition of setUp when I want to write a new test. > > The cost of seeing how the setUp is done is high: need to open a new window, clicking to restore the context on the first window, ... > > > > Am I the only one? > > > > > > No. I would like too. > > > > But not only for tests. I often need to look at several related methods at once while developing. > > > > Laurent. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > Alexandre > > -- > > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Aug. 19, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] setUp and test methods

by laurent laffont

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>wrote: > Before leading a revolution, we can maybe have this work for unit test > first :-) > > Actually, when I think about it, having not the setUp visible when writing > tests make the setUp functionality mostly useless. > Also, I usually write the setUp to remove duplication, so often after the second test method. A refactoring "extract to setUp" would be cool too. Another point, when I have a hierarchy of TestCase I often feel I need a "merged setUp view" Laurent. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > > On 19 Aug 2011, at 15:19, laurent laffont wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Alexandre Bergel < > alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I know there are many TDD shoguns around. > > > > I was wondering whether I am the only one suffering from the need to see > the definition of setUp before writing a test method. Unfortunately, current > tool does not automatically show the definition of setUp when I want to > write a new test. > > The cost of seeing how the setUp is done is high: need to open a new > window, clicking to restore the context on the first window, ... > > > > Am I the only one? > > > > > > No. I would like too. > > > > But not only for tests. I often need to look at several related methods > at once while developing. > > > > Laurent. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > Alexandre > > -- > > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > >

Aug. 19, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] setUp and test methods

by Alexandre Bergel

Before leading a revolution, we can maybe have this work for unit test first :-) Actually, when I think about it, having not the setUp visible when writing tests make the setUp functionality mostly useless. Cheers, Alexandre On 19 Aug 2011, at 15:19, laurent laffont wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > Hi! > > I know there are many TDD shoguns around. > > I was wondering whether I am the only one suffering from the need to see the definition of setUp before writing a test method. Unfortunately, current tool does not automatically show the definition of setUp when I want to write a new test. > The cost of seeing how the setUp is done is high: need to open a new window, clicking to restore the context on the first window, ... > > Am I the only one? > > > No. I would like too. > > But not only for tests. I often need to look at several related methods at once while developing. > > Laurent. > > > > Cheers, > Alexandre > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Aug. 19, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] setUp and test methods

by laurent laffont

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>wrote: > Hi! > > I know there are many TDD shoguns around. > > I was wondering whether I am the only one suffering from the need to see > the definition of setUp before writing a test method. Unfortunately, current > tool does not automatically show the definition of setUp when I want to > write a new test. > The cost of seeing how the setUp is done is high: need to open a new > window, clicking to restore the context on the first window, ... > > Am I the only one? > No. I would like too. But not only for tests. I often need to look at several related methods at once while developing. Laurent. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > >

Aug. 19, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] setUp and test methods

by Alexandre Bergel

Having the setUp next to the definition of a test is in my opinion the way to go (subliminal message for Ben :-) Alexandre On 19 Aug 2011, at 15:14, Frank Shearar wrote: > On 19 August 2011 14:09, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I know there are many TDD shoguns around. >> >> I was wondering whether I am the only one suffering from the need to see the definition of setUp before writing a test method. Unfortunately, current tool does not automatically show the definition of setUp when I want to write a new test. >> The cost of seeing how the setUp is done is high: need to open a new window, clicking to restore the context on the first window, ... >> >> Am I the only one? > > Nope, I suffer from this problem too. I've been thinking about a more > general problem, that of displaying multiple method definitions in the > same place/window/whatever. > > It seems the solution is two-fold: > * write a widget that can display multiple methods in the same pane, and > * tell the system that you want to see certain methods together. > > In the case of tests, you could always use reflection - you're viewing > a method starting with "test" in a TestCase subclass, so if there's a > setUp method (or series of setUp methods, in the case of overriden > methods), display them together. > > frank > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Aug. 19, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] setUp and test methods

by Frank Shearar

On 19 August 2011 14:09, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > Hi! > > I know there are many TDD shoguns around. > > I was wondering whether I am the only one suffering from the need to see the definition of setUp before writing a test method. Unfortunately, current tool does not automatically show the definition of setUp when I want to write a new test. > The cost of seeing how the setUp is done is high: need to open a new window, clicking to restore the context on the first window, ... > > Am I the only one? Nope, I suffer from this problem too. I've been thinking about a more general problem, that of displaying multiple method definitions in the same place/window/whatever. It seems the solution is two-fold: * write a widget that can display multiple methods in the same pane, and * tell the system that you want to see certain methods together. In the case of tests, you could always use reflection - you're viewing a method starting with "test" in a TestCase subclass, so if there's a setUp method (or series of setUp methods, in the case of overriden methods), display them together. frank

Aug. 19, 2011

[Pharo-project] setUp and test methods

by Alexandre Bergel

Hi! I know there are many TDD shoguns around. I was wondering whether I am the only one suffering from the need to see the definition of setUp before writing a test method. Unfortunately, current tool does not automatically show the definition of setUp when I want to write a new test. The cost of seeing how the setUp is done is high: need to open a new window, clicking to restore the context on the first window, ... Am I the only one? Cheers, Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Aug. 19, 2011